I disagree with Brett's statement that the only binding should be JSON. I believe that the only binding should be a binary protocol of some sort. We differ in our beliefs there, but we do both believe there should only be a single binding. One way to do it.
The protocol discussion and testing stages should be very interesting when we go through the various options as a community.
Cheers Terry MacDonald
> On 30 Jul 2015 1:38 pm, "Eric Burger" <
> wrote: >> >> Fine with me. Anyone else? >> >> The counter argument might be “Why bother with UML?” I would offer it is because UML and OWL will let us see the actual relationships. What may be cool is to compile them into JSON bindings. That’s a <hint> research project. >> >>
> On Jul 24, 2015, at 3:00 PM, Jordan, Bret <
> wrote: >> > >>
> On the community call there was a statement made that STIX will continue down the old path of UML and then OWL with bindings for XML and others. There needs to be a single binding, and it should be JSON. The only reason I wanted UML was to break our dependency on XML-isims to make it easier to do JSON. >> > >>
> Bret >> > >>
> Sent from my Commodore 64 >> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >>
> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >>
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>> > >>
